disable_camera_mic_permanently

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and clearly warns that the action is permanent and cannot be undone. It also specifies host formats. However, it does not mention required permissions or potential side effects on camera operation, but the core destructive behavior is transparent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise: first sentence states the action and permanence, second sentence provides the critical warning, then parameter guidance follows. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple two-parameter tool, the description is nearly complete: it covers the action, irreversibility, parameter formats, and provenance. It lacks explicit alternative routing and output/response details, but the output schema exists and is not required to be explained. Overall adequate for the tool's complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does: host is described as 'console name, ID, or composite ID (MAC:numericId format)' and camera_id is marked REQUIRED with instructions to obtain it from list_cameras. This is practical and compensates for the bare schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description states a specific action: permanently disable the microphone on a Protect camera. The verb 'disable' and resource 'microphone' are clear, and the permanent aspect is explicitly highlighted, distinguishing it from any temporary mute or update operation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains how to obtain the parameters (host formats, camera_id from list_cameras) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_camera, nor does it mention any conditions or prerequisites beyond the permanent nature. Some guidance is provided, but no comparative usage context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.